Any folks here into MUSHing/MUXing/MUDding? I kinda think Erfworld would be a very neat setting for that kind of a game and it would be a great platform to run the strategy elements with the role-playing on top.

In fact, if we want to make things more RPG-like, rather than TBS, then we can replicate Erfworld more closely in the rules. I had a rant on my mind as to why the current magic system in the New Erf rules is rather clumsy, and one reason was that it was not suited to the kind of game it claimed to rule. TBSes are played by default with Eyemancy tables, we don't use Hats for scouting, and to implement a system where Thinkamancy thinkagrams are actually needed to order your troops or talk to other players is pointless.

If we play an RPG, where the scope of our characters is limited by their immediate surroundings, all this changes. (There are other reasons why New Erf magic is really really clumsy though, so don't ape it, please, when making your rule set.)

_________________The whole point of this is lost if you keep it a secret.

Yep, obviously the MUSH environment is perhaps better suited to a more RP focused look at things. The strategy game/reality of Erfworld is the backdrop for meaningful RP and well, there's no real reason it couldn't be awesome in itself.

It would be trivial to limit in character player movement according to a move stat, but the passage of turns is a bit more problematic to orchestrate. Doing away with separate turns for sides would do the trick, allowing players to make their moves when they log in, but it is a shift. Also, players probably need to be special somehow and there might not be enough 'mancer and warlord positions to go around, so that needs some thinking. Maybe the regular (non-player) units would still be limited by turn-based movement, plotted weekly or so and initiating battles would require a player on site to do it.

Just funneling ideas out of my brain, but I think Erfworld would make a lovely setting for a role-playing MUSH with a nice coded system to ground it in Erf-reality.

I was thinking that the game would be RP, as in, the players are Warlords/Casters and they go around having adventures of whimsy. Players then could all be units of the same side, and not a play a high level view of the game a-la TBSs.

_________________The whole point of this is lost if you keep it a secret.

I'd recommend having all players be barbarian casters, actually. The Magic Kingdom would make a great central location for all players to start in, turns would be mostly irrelevant, and 'being hired by a side' could be implemented as 'dungeons/instances'. Portal Park is a logical spot to allow people to come and go on these missions, and each region can have player homes, chat / learning areas, etc.

I'd recommend having all players be barbarian casters, actually. The Magic Kingdom would make a great central location for all players to start in, turns would be mostly irrelevant, and 'being hired by a side' could be implemented as 'dungeons/instances'. Portal Park is a logical spot to allow people to come and go on these missions, and each region can have player homes, chat / learning areas, etc.

Would everyone have to be a caster, or would be break the cannon and allow barbarian warlords there as well. We could break cannon by giving casters leadership and options to trade casting abliity with combat ability (but not allowing a total min max situation). I don't see a great comming by inforcing strict cannon though, since many casters would not be fun to play (thinkamancy, mathamancy, moneymancy), while others would rule the game (dollmancy, croakamancy, dirtamancy)

Alternitivly we could be units in a stack, which would give us more connection to the other players, but we would run into a problem since casters would be a lot stronger than non casters.

Keep in mind that it's not likely that many people would be on at the same time. It would be better to focus the environment on supporting interactive RP and solo adventuring, plus maybe some PvP arena areas, if for no other reason than that models existing gaming patterns.

Combat types are typically well-suited for grinding for XP, which is something I'd personally like to avoid. I think the instances should be more interesting than 'go through portal, kill X creatures/units, return'.

Having said that, perhaps we can make a 'magic-kingdom-like' area for barbarian warlords, and allow Hatamancers to summon them into instances? Optionally, perhaps barbarian warlords could just exist within their own instances, and either allow casters to enter them or agree to be summoned.

Hatamancers, Moneymancers, and Thinkamancers would need to be implemented as NPCs, I think, to prevent abuses. Thinkamancers especially should only be NPCs, so that while all casters could learn some few spells in other disciplines, we could avoid the caster link issues by making them plot points for instances rather than letting players experiment. With 24 caster types, we could forbid a majority of them and still allow for multiple play styles. For example:

This looks interesting, and I'd agree with MarbitChow's assessment of the magic disciplines, although I wonder whether disciplines like Dollamancy, Dirtamancy, Shockamancy, and Croakamancy might basically become XP-grind-disciplines.

_________________"The Infantrymen of Erfworld have nothing to lose but their chains. They have Erfworld to win. Infantry of all sides: Unite!"--Kawl Mawx, Master-class Moneymancer

I thought about that. I think there would be enough interest in combat scenarios that we'd want the combat casters, but keep in mind that casters are pretty weak physically, so they'd be more vulnerable (and limited by juice) than warlord types would be. They might be able to level up faster than other classes unless we make interesting ways to level for the other classes (instances of sides hiring, etc.), but levels wouldn't have an effect on RP, and we could limit 'master' levels by requiring special quests simulating the caster gaining that 'profound insight' into their field. Also, since levelling is exponential, there's a natural cap.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum